WEBVTT SOLEDAD: AT AN EVENT BILLED AS A TOWN HALL MEETING AROUND AFRICAN-AMERICAN ISSUES, DONALD TRUMP REPOSED INSTITUTING STOP AND FRISK NATIONWIDE. HE SAID HE WOULD DO STOP AND FRISK BECAUSE "IT WORKS INCREDIBLY WELL IN NEW YORK CITY." THE PRACTICES CRITICIZED BECAUSE IT ALLOWS OFFICERS TO PROFILE CITIZENS BASED ON RACE AND BASED ON THE CHALLENGE TO NEW YORK CITY AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IT WAS FOUND TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. WITH THE CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, NICE TO SEE YOU. LET'S HOP RIGHT INTO THIS. THE JUDGE FOUND THAT NEW YORK CITY AND THE NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT HEADING GAGED IN ILLEGAL AND DISCRIMINATORY ACTIONS VIOLATING BOTH THE 14TH AMEND MEANT THE FOURTH AMENDMENT FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE STOPPED AND FRISKED. WHAT HAPPENED? >> THEY INSTITUTED A PROGRAM CALLED STOP AND FRISK. IT STOPPED PEOPLE ON THE STREETS OF NEW YORK CITY. UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, YOU CAN ONLY STOP PEOPLE IF YOU HAVE A REASONABLE ARTICULABLE SUSPICION FOR STOPPING SOMEONE THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG. THE COURT CLEARLY FOUND THAT THE PRACTICE WAS ESSENTIALLY A 10 YEAR WALKING CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION IN WHICH OVER 87% OF THE PEOPLE STOPPED OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND LATINO. 90% OF THE PEOPLE THEY STOPPED DIDN'T GET A TICKET OR DID NOTHING WRONG. A STOP TO BEING INNOCENT PEOPLE ON THE BASIS OF RACE. SOLEDA AND THAT WAS LOOKING AT A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, MORE THAN 4 MILLION PEOPLE BETWEEN 2004 IN 2012. THAT 90% NUMBER, PEOPLE THAT DIDN'T GET A TICKET, DIDN'T GET ARRESTED, NOTHING HAPPEN TO THEM AT ALL. THEY WERE ESSENTIALLY INNOCENT OF ANYTHING? I REMEMBER THE MAYOR SAYING THERE WAS A VALUE IN INSTITUTING FEAR IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY WOULD BE STOPPED. HE SAID IT WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE NOT TO CARRY A WEAPON WITH THEM. IS THAT A FAIR ARGUMENT? >> IT'S NOT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. NUMBER ONE, A MAYOR SHOULD NOT INTIMIDATE AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID THE POLICE ARE GOING TO STOP AND FRISK THEM. THE MAYOR , MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, WAS SENDING OUT THIS MAJOR FRICTION THAT STOP AND FRISK WAS ACTUALLY REDUCING CRIME. HE WAS LOOKING AT THE CLIMBING CRIME NUMBERS AND SAYING STOP AND FRISK WAS THE REASON. WE FOUND OUT THAT THE CRIME RATE HAD BEEN DECLINING PRIOR TO STOP AND FRISK. SOLEDA IT ANGERED SO MANY PEOPLE LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY. I WOULD IMAGINE LONG TERM IT WAS NOT HELPFUL FOR FIGHTING CRIME. >> THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT IS , IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE FOR ANY COMMUNITY WHERE PARENTS ARE CONCERNED THAT WHEN THEIR CHILDREN GO TO SCHOOL, THEY MIGHT GET STOPPED AND HARASSED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IMAGINE WHAT IT'S LIKE WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO WORK NOT KNOWING IF THEY ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME HOME. THAT IS A DISASTER. THE WORK IS STILL HAPPENING TO BUILD RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHEN YOU INSTITUTE THESE TYPES OF POLICIES, IT TAKES YEARS AND SOMETIMES GENERATIONS TO REBUILD TRUST BETWEEN POLICE AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

Wednesday night, at an event billed as a town hall to discuss the concerns of African Americans, Republican nominee Donald Trump called for nationally implementing the police practice known as “stop and frisk.”
"One of the things I'd do,” Trump told Sean Hannity in a pre-taped program. “Is I would do stop-and-frisk. I think you have to. We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive and, you know, you really help people sort of change their mind automatically."
The practice of stop and frisk was ruled unconstitutional in New York in 2013 after it was found to have disproportionately targeted minorities and stopped people without reasonable suspicion. The actions violated both the 4th and the 14th amendments.
The federal class action lawsuit was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights. Executive Director of the Center, Vince Warren, explains how the practice was a “failure.”
“The court found the practice of "stop and frisk" as practiced by the NYPD was a ten year walking constitutional violation in which over 87 percent of the people that the police stopped were African American and Latino but 90 percent of the people stopped, didn't even get a ticket, did nothing wrong. They were stopping innocent people on the basis of race.”
At the time, then Mayor Michael Bloomberg claimed the declining crime rate was due to the proactive approach by the New York Police Department of “stop and frisk.” However, Warren and his team noted that wasn’t the case.
“What we found out was that the crime rate had been declining before stop and frisk, number two. After our lawsuit and after the police department stopped doing stop and frisk, they almost ceased that practice at the end of lawsuit, the crime rate still went down. Stop and frisk had nothing to do with controlling crime rates.”
Check out our video for more on the practice of “stop and frisk” in New York City also see Warren’s full interview here.

Wednesday night, at an event billed as a town hall to discuss the concerns of African Americans, Republican nominee Donald Trump called for nationally implementing the police practice known as “stop and frisk.”

Advertisement

"One of the things I'd do,” Trump told Sean Hannity in a pre-taped program. “Is I would do stop-and-frisk. I think you have to. We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive and, you know, you really help people sort of change their mind automatically."

The practice of stop and frisk was ruled unconstitutional in New York in 2013 after it was found to have disproportionately targeted minorities and stopped people without reasonable suspicion. The actions violated both the 4th and the 14th amendments.

The federal class action lawsuit was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights. Executive Director of the Center, Vince Warren, explains how the practice was a “failure.”

“The court found the practice of "stop and frisk" as practiced by the NYPD was a ten year walking constitutional violation in which over 87 percent of the people that the police stopped were African American and Latino but 90 percent of the people stopped, didn't even get a ticket, did nothing wrong. They were stopping innocent people on the basis of race.”

At the time, then Mayor Michael Bloomberg claimed the declining crime rate was due to the proactive approach by the New York Police Department of “stop and frisk.” However, Warren and his team noted that wasn’t the case.